Come on you should do better than that - You do realise that that is a 2001 article right - see more of these outdated and out of context statistics that show nothing.

And it rose 40% in 2 years after a ban, I wonder what it is like now vs pre 2001, cos what I saw on wikipaedia was up to 2009 - the last year numbers are available has to be newer than that I would imagine.

However world wide crime rose through the 90's and started dropping from the mid 03-04 time frame through the end of 2010, and in 11 it went up a little ... 12 ... we dunno yet. Crime cycles sorta follow economic cycles but with a shift in time frame. Or some like that.

In a way the "prosperity" cycles create a class that is prosperous ... in the 90's it was tech workers, and the 04-07 was financial and real estate investors, and it creates a underclass that is desparate cos they are either missing the boat or getting robbed by the prosperous class. I freaking love recessions. Especially the ones where the govt has recognized that there is a recession and have expanded the net. I would have liked to see some of the financial criminals go to jail, for that the enforcement has been very very toothless, but otherwise recessions are IMHO where no one is "making out like bandits". Well atleast they are quiet about it.

Cool.Buddha.

Logged

-----------------------------------------------------------------I run a business based on other people's junk.-----------------------------------------------------------------

I had linked two other articles which are more recent as well. Also from your own wikipedia source:

Quote

Compared with the United States of America, the United Kingdom has a slightly higher total crime rate per capita of approximately 85 per 1000 people, while in the USA it is approximately 80.[57]

I wonder if this has anything to do with the criminals counting on an unarmed populous? In fact, some of the articles I've linked point to that.

Quote

Since 1998, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales increased by 110%,[58] from 2,378 in 1998/99 to 5,001 in 2005/06. Most of the rise in injuries were in the category slight injuries from the non-air weapons. "Slight" in this context means an injury that was not classified as "serious" (i.e., did not require detention in hospital, did not involve fractures, concussion, severe general shock, penetration by a bullet or multiple shot wounds). In 2005/06, 87% of such injuries were defined as "slight," which includes the use of firearms as a threat only. In 2007, the British government was accused by Shadow Home Secretary David Davis of making "inaccurate and misleading" statements claiming that gun crime was falling, after official figures showed that gun-related killings and injuries recorded by police had risen more than fourfold since 1998, mainly due to a rise in non-fatal injuries.[59][60] In 2007, Justice Minister Jack Straw told the BBC, "We are concerned that within the overall record, which is a good one, of crime going down in the last 10-11 years, the number of gun-related incidents has gone up. But it has now started to fall."[61]

That's interesting. Some say gun violence had increased 4 times since the ban, and that reporting is inaccurate. It also mentions that gun related incidents are starting to go down, but it doesn't seem to say they have gone down to below pre-ban levels anywhere I can see.

Quote

In 2008 The Independent reported that there were 42 gun-related deaths in Great Britain, a 20-year low.[62] However, in late 2009 The Telegraph reported that gun crime had doubled in the last 10 years, with an increase in both firearms offences and deaths. A government spokesman said this increase was a result of a change in reporting practices in 2001 and that gun crime had actually fallen since 2005. Chris Grayling, the Shadow Home Secretary (an opposition party spokesperson), attributed the rise to ineffective policing and an out-of-control gang culture.[63] Writing in the British Journal of Criminology, Dr Jeanine Baker and Dr Samara McPhedran found no measurable effect detectable from the 1997 firearms legislation with ARIMA statistical analysis. [9]

Also interesting that someone who works for a Journal of Criminology should find no measureable effect after the ban.

The UK leads the USA in ALL violent crime bar one... murder - BUT - what the UK calls murder and what the USA call it for Crime stats varies. In the UK, murder is recorded only for a conviction of murder, in the US it is a murder stat even if it is a final conviction of manslaughter. But muggings, rapes, bashings, etc., are all higher in the UK per capita.

Also of interest... in Australia there is Tourist Mecca known as The Gold Coast. The crime stats show there is a murder at The Gold Coast every week to 10 days. The number which are reported in the newspaper or on the TV is... maybe two three a year. Cannot scare the tourist dollar away.

Also of interest.... Knife Crime in the UK is through the roof. So much so, some org called Doctors Against Knives or some such, want all knives sold to be round tipped. Dumbasses think peeps won't take a knife to a grinder and make it a sharp pointed one and then stab as per usual.

Murder happens a lot easier with guns, especially ones that can dump 100+ in seconds. Its particularly easy to shoot down strangers in a crowd with that.

The blunt knife ... you do know when stabbed with a blunt knife, you still die but in a lot more misery ...Cool.Buddha.

very true my friend. as hte old saying goes though, "outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns. " and knives too it may seem. the law abiding citizen, will surrender said weapons to oblige, the criminal wont. they wont care about the concequences. even if hte punishments were made severe. say get caught with a gun, and get automatic life in prson w/o parole. then someone else will complain about the skyrocketing costs of incarceration. unless one as an automatic weapons permit, having thsoe is illegal in most, if not all places in the us. heres the thing though, semi auto weapons can be made fully automatic weapons in minutes, with LEGALLY available kits. just the two cannot be sold together in the same business. if loopholes were clsoed, many problems would decline

Logged

Jan 14 2010 0310 I miss you momVielen dank Patrick. Vielen dank".A proud Mormon"if you come in with the bottom of your cast black, neither one of us will be happy"- Alan Silverman MD

I am not talking about anything that takes 10 mins to kill 1 person. You can kill somone with a toothpick if you stuck it in their ear and let them bleed till dead. I can assure you, if you were to do that you would be committing just that 1 murder for the year ...

The real battle is to stop the mass killing that happens in 30 sec or less.Heck the swiss style "encouraged to carry a firearm in open view" would even work, except there are a lot more nutcases in the US who will mis/abuse it. The swiss are far more disciplined and trained. You may stop mass killings but easily pile up that many or more when people kill each other over parking spots or other trivia.

Cool.Buddha.

Logged

-----------------------------------------------------------------I run a business based on other people's junk.-----------------------------------------------------------------

Well after a while of nut-cases shooting each other over a parking space there will be far fewer of them (nut-cases) and there will be more parking spaces available. Then the rest of us will have a more peaceful life.

Make it a requirement to do two years military service for EVERYONE, no exemptions. Would change people's attitude towards weapons, would make everyone fitter and the nutcases would stay in the Military or get sent to a ward with padded walls a little earlier.

I actually think would should bring compulsive service back into Australia. I did reserves and it was one of the best decisions. It sucked but it did give me skills.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It seems to clearly state that United State's citizens have the right to bear arms, and that right shall not be infringed.

According to thefreedictionary.com, Arms: 1. A weapon, especially a firearm.

So, by definition, United States citizens have the right to own guns, and that right cannot be taken away.

So, on to what this thread is actually about.

I've seen most of the anti-gun points in this thread too many times, and the logic behind them is lacking.

Let's start with personal firearms for protection, and work our way up to the whole militia ordeal.My hometown has somewhat-active gang activity in the less-than-desireable areas. Yes, there are a few gun crimes, and just about all of those involve someone breaking into someones house and shooting them, shooting someone over a car, or shooting someone for no reason.

Not once have I read of these incidents in which the victims were carrying firearms, bsides gang shooting each other.

However, there are also multiple incidents of armed citizens scaring the bajeezus out of a would be robber, even though sometimes the robbers were armed themselves. One account for example:

2 local gang members showed up at a man's house (the reasons for this were not disclosed by the police department), and threatened to shoot him. He, in turn, went and grabbed an assault rifle (which he had the necessary permits to own) from his closet, and told them if they came in his house, he would shoot them both. They broke in his front door, and he fired on them. One was killed instantly, the other tried to run away, shooting as he ran, and later died at the hospital. The homeowner was unharmed.

I've had friends have knives pulled on them in robbery attempts, only to flash a concealed handgun, and have the idiot robber run scared.

I know crime rates are not the same in every area, but given the time it takes a police officer to respond to an incident, guns invariably protect people as a first line of defense.

Now, on to the militia point.

Yes, an assault rifle will not do much to, say, an M1A1 Abrams. A shell of 12 guage buckshot will just piss off a humvee driver. Regular firearms won't do much to stop a well regulated military.

I've recently been studying up in the old military handbook for guerilla warfare tactics, troop placement, rigging and other...things.

If anyone has ever paid attention to the news, you will notice that the US has been supplying rebel faction in other countries with weapons for years, and they have overthrown armies without United States military intervention.

I saw a post a few pages back about IED's being heavy and bulky. I can make "something" that will burn through depleted uranium and steel plate armor in 15 seconds flat, and is about the size of a notebook binder. I can rig a rather destructive item from a model rocket and other things that don't need to be mentioned.

There are ways for civilians to stand against an organized military, but they themselves must be organized.

An organized militia. With soldiers, people gathering intel, pilots, engineers, and all of them happily smiling and in the same clothes as Plain Joe over there.

It wouldn't be easy to oppose a military force, but it could be done with time, the right minds, and in secrecy.

One point that I haven't seen, but I may have missed, is the assumption that all military and police personnell would stand against the civilians in a government vs the people war.

Batman shooting: No concealed firearm carriersColumbine: lol U CANT HAS GUNS AT SCHOOLTexas shooting incident...wait....that one wasn't on the news. Something about a teacher having a hunting rifle, and shooting the gunman and saving students lives.....hm.....

Well armed civilians can prevent disasters that are being caused by well armed idiots.

My college campus has been pushing for concealed carry on campus. The local police have been backing it. The former school President was pushing for it up until he moved. It's failing because people are too scared of guns.

My cop friend gets weird looks from people when he's in off duty clothes carrying his gun, even though his badge is strapped over the holster.

Make it a requirement to do two years military service for EVERYONE, no exemptions. Would change people's attitude towards weapons, would make everyone fitter and the nutcases would stay in the Military or get sent to a ward with padded walls a little earlier.

I actually think would should bring compulsive service back into Australia. I did reserves and it was one of the best decisions. It sucked but it did give me skills.

I seriously wish this were possible in the US. However we'd need a special branch just for the unbelievable amount of pussies/ax-wound, hippy, self-entitled, weak, morbidly obese pieces of shaZam! that make up a sadly large(no pun intended) part of our society. There's nothing tougher than Parris Island (I might be a little biased ) and the aforementioned have NO place there. We could also consider reinstating military service for young able bodied offenders. Wanna steal a car? Go your ass to Afghanistan and get shot at along side all the other societal drains. Maybe then people would appreciate how motherfucking easy we have it. Sry for ranting